Re: Dem & Media Hypocrisy Regarding Biden's Preemptive Pardons

On Jan 22, 2025 at 12:00:16 PM PST, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com>
wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

Jan 22, 2025 at 7:47:17 AM PST, Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

 

. . .

 

I'm more critical of my own party than you are when they get things
wrong. Legally, those clips demonstrated a misrepresentation of the
difference between "guilty" -- the verdict upon finding (by jury or judge)
of proof beyond a reasonable doubt -- and actual innocence, that is, a
suspect or defendant who didn't actually commit the crimes he's accused
of. No jury (except in movies) is asked to find actual innocence 'cuz,
you know, they have no ability to investigate. Actual innocence isn't
legal semantics that the criminal code simply doesn't perfectly apply to
the proveable facts, but that the accused wasn't party to the crime.

 

There is, however, a motion one can bring before a judge for a finding of
actual innocence.

 
I know nothing about this. This csnnot be done at trial, right? This is
a post-conviction motion?

Typically used by a defendant post-acquittal to expunge all records of arrest
and prosecution. It essentially is a judicial ruling that says, "Not did the
state fail to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, but no reasonable person
could rationally believe that the defendant committed the crime."

It's also a motion often brought by the wrongfully incarcerated who are later
exonerated by DNA or other new evidence that shows they couldn't have
committed the crime.